Thread: SAPdb vs. Postgresql
Hello all. A client of mine asked me today how SAPdb (http://www.sapdb.org) compares with Postgresql. Anyone know? If you have had any experience with SAPdb, or have any pointers to benchmarks, comparisons, etc., I'd really appreciate it if you could pass them along. Thanks! John
We looked at SAP vs PostgresQL for a number of reasons. One was that it was supposed to be more "enterprise ready". Supposedly it had replication, but in the latest version, they renamed it; their replication was more of a import-export utility. SAP is strange. The setup it unusual, and poorly documented. The usage is poorly documented. Finally, when we went to use SAP, it worked for a while, then the database seemed to get corrupted. I wrote up some quick notes on SAP if you are interested. Overall, we weren't impressed. There is support on the newsgroups, but the volume isn't a 10th of what you'll find on PostgresQL. Also, look at MySQL 4 - with InnoDB and replication, it's looking good. 4.1 will have subselects. David. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Wells" <jb@sourceillustrated.com> To: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 11:37 AM Subject: [GENERAL] SAPdb vs. Postgresql Hello all. A client of mine asked me today how SAPdb (http://www.sapdb.org) compares with Postgresql. Anyone know? If you have had any experience with SAPdb, or have any pointers to benchmarks, comparisons, etc., I'd really appreciate it if you could pass them along. Thanks! John ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
John Wells wrote: > Hello all. > > A client of mine asked me today how SAPdb (http://www.sapdb.org) compares > with Postgresql. > > Anyone know? If you have had any experience with SAPdb, or have any > pointers to benchmarks, comparisons, etc., I'd really appreciate it if you > could pass them along. I haven't used SAPdb so, with a very large grain of salt from reading the SAPdb docs, I'd say: Some SAPdb features not found in PostgreSQL: 1. Subtransactions 2. Recursive Roles 3. Synonyms 4. Automatic garbage collection 5. Stored procedures with exception handling Some PostgreSQL features not found in SAPdb: 1. User-defined types 2. Multiversioning as concurrency control 3. Rules 4. User-defined functions in a large number of languages 5. Partial and functional indexes Both have features such as: 1. Views 2. Subselects 3. Referential Integrity 4. Transactions 5. Support for large values 6. Triggers I'm sure there's more in both camps, but that's a starting point. As an example, the SAPdb docs specify updateable views which PostgreSQL doesn't directly have but can be implemented using RULEs, which SAPdb doesn't have. Likewise, SAPdb has stored procedures, but I don't see user-defined functions. PostgreSQL uses user-defined functions as the basis of stored procedures. SAPdb has a numeric data type with 38 digits of precision. PostgreSQL's numeric data type is of arbitrary precision, altough I believe the backend is compiled with an equally arbitrary limit of 100 digits. PostgreSQL's R.I. suffers from concurrency problems. I don't know if SAPdb does. SAPdb limits the use of the LONG data type in stored procedures, whereas PostgreSQL doesn't. PostgreSQL's TOASTed values, however, are limited to 1 gig, whereas the SABdb LONG is limited to 2 gig. So even where the various fact sheets might say a given feature has been implemented, the devil is in the details... Hope that helps, Mike Mascari mascarm@mascari.com
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:58:57AM -0800, David Griffiths wrote: > SAP is strange. The setup it unusual, and poorly documented. The usage is > poorly documented. Finally, when we went to use SAP, it worked for a while, > then the database seemed to get corrupted. I've heard about that. A gratis accounting application very promoted here in Chile uses SAPdb as it's backend, and apparently the driver manages to corrupt the data somehow. It's usable now, and becomes unusable tomorrow. I wouldn't trust such a RDBMS, no matter how much features has it got. I also tried to compare it to Postgres, but the lack of documentation didn't precisely help me get started, and it was only a hobby so I never came to it. -- Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>) "Estoy de acuerdo contigo en que la verdad absoluta no existe... El problema es que la mentira sí existe y tu estás mintiendo" (G. Lama)
I went through most of the docs, but found them sparse and scattered. They desperately need a rewrite. I also found mention that SAPDB does not support versioning, which means you can get inconsistent reads (not ACID). It also does not have text-searching, as PosgresQL and MySQL (but not InnoDB) do. SAP is pouring money into it, however, and has alot of developers. They need to get some key features in place, however. First, some sort of high-availability (PostgresQL needs something more solid as well; Oracle definately leads here). Second, good docs. Third, ACID. Fourth, a decent build process (get this - it's written at least partially in Pascal, and they have a pre-processor that turns it into C, which is then compiled; apparently the build process is unusably cryptic and thus not very accessible to anyone outside SAP). David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> To: "David Griffiths" <dgriffiths@boats.com> Cc: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:45 PM Subject: Re: [GENERAL] SAPdb vs. Postgresql > On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:58:57AM -0800, David Griffiths wrote: > > > SAP is strange. The setup it unusual, and poorly documented. The usage is > > poorly documented. Finally, when we went to use SAP, it worked for a while, > > then the database seemed to get corrupted. > > I've heard about that. A gratis accounting application very promoted > here in Chile uses SAPdb as it's backend, and apparently the driver > manages to corrupt the data somehow. It's usable now, and becomes > unusable tomorrow. I wouldn't trust such a RDBMS, no matter how much > features has it got. > > I also tried to compare it to Postgres, but the lack of documentation > didn't precisely help me get started, and it was only a hobby so I never > came to it. > > -- > Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>) > "Estoy de acuerdo contigo en que la verdad absoluta no existe... > El problema es que la mentira sí existe y tu estás mintiendo" (G. Lama) >
I've heard that sapdb was adabase some time ago... I've never worked with sapdb so I cannot tell you anything good or bad about it, but I found this at slashdot: http://slashdot.org/developers/01/04/28/016220.shtml